'Good poll. 'Tough choice but probably Brando, maybe Nicholson. I really like this but, since the list includes no women, maybe specify "male actors," especially so no one assumes that no woman has gotten a "nom, nom, nom."

Al Pacino and Jamie Foxx are the only ones, and they were not nominated the previous or the following years.

Hey wait a minute, you're right. I didn't check the list. It says that no actress was nominated three times in a row, but I think Bette Davis, Greer Garson, Elizabeth Taylor and Jennifer Jones apply, they were not only nominated three times in a row but also four times... I even think Katharine Hepburn also did.

Yeah, I don't get why there are no actresses. And I don't think it's a matter of categories, Al Pacino is listed for "The Godfather" and it was a supporting performance.

Oh yeah, Bette Davie was nominated five years in a row, winning once, Greer Garson was nominated five years in a row, winning once, and like Elmo said the following were nominated four times: Elizabeth Taylor (won once) and Jennifer Jones (won once).

If Spencer is on any list he will always get my vote. No others are in his league. All the other actors have a classic leading actor "Look". Spencer does not. Tracey/Hepburn and Bogey/Bacall Rule! You know how to whistle, don't you, Steve? You just put your lips together and... blow.Name any actor other than Tracey that can do THIS!

Matt Drayton
:
Now Mr. Prentice, clearly a most
reasonable man, says he has no wish to offend me but wants to know if
I'm some kind of a *nut*. And Mrs. Prentice says that like her husband
I'm a burned-out old shell of a man who cannot even remember what it's
like to love a woman the way her son loves my daughter. And strange as
it seems, that's the first statement made to me all day with which I am
prepared to take issue... cause I think you're wrong, you're as wrong as
you can be. I admit that I hadn't considered it, hadn't even thought
about it, but I know exactly how he feels about her and there is
nothing, absolutely nothing that you son feels for my daughter that I
didn't feel for Christina. Old- yes. Burned-out- certainly, but I can
tell you the memories are still there- clear, intact, indestructible,
and they'll be there if I live to be 110. Where John made his mistake I
think was in attaching so much importance to what her mother and I might
think... because in the final analysis it doesn't matter a damn what we
think. The only thing that matters is what they feel, and how much they
feel, for each other. And if it's half of what we felt- that's
everything. As for you two and the problems you're going to have, they
seem almost unimaginable, but you'll have no problem with me, and I
think when Christina and I and your mother have some time to work on him
you'll have no problem with your father, John. But you do know, I'm
sure you know, what you're up against. There'll be 100 million people
right here in this country who will be shocked and offended and appalled
and the two of you will just have to ride that out, maybe every day for
the rest of your lives. You could try to ignore those people, or you
could feel sorry for them and for their prejudice and their bigotry and
their blind hatred and stupid fears, but where necessary you'll just
have to cling tight to each other and say "screw all those people"!
Anybody could make a case, a hell of a good case, against your getting
married. The arguments are so obvious that nobody has to make them. But
you're two wonderful people who happened to fall in love and happened to
have a pigmentation problem, and I think that now, no matter what kind
of a case some bastard could make against your getting married, there
would be only one thing worse, and that would be if - knowing what you
two are and knowing what you two have and knowing what you two feel- you
didn't get married. Well, Tillie, when the hell are we gonna get some
dinner?

Ok...coming back to this several (months) later... The list is only for LEAD roles. I blew it with Pacino (his Godfather nom was for supporting which caused a huge scandal at the time) but he still has three lead noms in a row, so he stays in with a correction.

Bradley Cooper was my bad - I thought he was lead for American Hustle and I didn't double-check. So he's gone.

-----------------------------------------------

Now, for the suggestions (throughout the whole thread):

IN:Bette Davis DOES qualify - she even has FIVE leads in five years. Good catch!Greer Garson also has five - added!Elizabeth Taylor - added

OUT:Emma Thompson's noms were not in consecutive years - Howards End was 1993, The Remains of the Day was 1994 and Sense and Sensibility was 1996.Teresa Wright did not have three leads in three years, plus two of hers are supporting.Cate Blanchett did not have three leads in three years, plus two of hers are supporting.Jennifer Jones' supporting nom keeps her off the list.Katherine Hepburn only has two in a row.

I'm not sure there wouldn't have been that more options if the category wasn't specified, not many actors have been nominated more than three years in a row regardless of the categories. Al Pacino would have one extra nomination for The Godfather, Jennifer Jones would have to be added along with Thelma Ritter and Bradley Cooper and that's about it.

INGRID BERGMAN1943: For Whom the Bell Tolls1944: Gaslight1945: The Bells of St Mary's

So, you have two more options in the lead roles. If you go for supporting, you'll have 3 more actors... and you'll have to consider the case of actors nominated twice the same year.

In my opinion, the category shouldn't matter, a nomination is a nomination, the feat isn't less impressive if one of the noms belongs to the supporting category, on the contrary it shows that the actors was able to portray roles in various ranges and was as good a leading player as a supporting.